Optimal selection of monitoring sites in cities for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance in sewage networks
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Selecting sampling points to monitor traces of SARS-CoV-2 in sewage at the intra-urban scale is no trivial task given the complexity of the networks and the multiple technical, economic and socio-environmental constraints involved. This paper proposes two algorithms for the automatic selection of sampling locations in sewage networks. The first algorithm, is for the optimal selection of a predefined number of sampling locations ensuring maximum coverage of inhabitants and minimum overlapping amongst selected sites (static approach). The second is for establishing a strategy of iterations of sample&analysis to identify patient zero and hot spots of COVID-19 infected inhabitants in cities (dynamic approach). The algorithms are based on graph-theory and are coupled to a greedy optimization algorithm. The usefulness of the algorithms is illustrated in the case study of Girona (NE Iberian Peninsula, 148,504 inhabitants). The results show that the algorithms are able to automatically propose locations for a given number of stations. In the case of Girona, always covering more than 60% of the manholes and with less than 3% of them overlapping amongst stations. Deploying 5, 6 or 7 stations results in more than 80% coverage in manholes and more than 85% of the inhabitants. For the dynamic sensor placement, we demonstrate that assigning infection probabilities to each manhole as a function of the number of inhabitants connected reduces the number of iterations required to detect the zero patient and the hot spot areas.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it